Blog

Financial sustainability Governance, regulation and compliance

2 January 2013, 12:49

Public service delivery is risky business

The end of the year saw government announcing a series of master classes to aid charities bidding for contracts to better understand the new public service delivery environment. Due in ...

Post byKatherine Smithson

Where next?

Events »

Monday, 17 June 2019
Advanced Charity Finance London More »

News »

Monday, 29 April 2019
Community Leisure UK and Charity Finance Group announce enhanced partnership for 2019/20 More »

The end of the year saw government announcing a series of master classes to aid charities bidding for contracts to better understand the new public service delivery environment. Due in Spring 2013, this complements the Commissioning Academy which aims to improve the relationship from the other side, helping commissioners understand how to interact with civil society. Both are welcome, much needed, and should help to improve understanding of the challenges and priorities for both parties – in particular informing their risk profiles. Although it’s a sweeping generalisation, it is fair to say that both charities and local authorities can be risk averse. For local authorities this is most clearly evident in an almost myopic focus on financial risk. However, given the nature of the services local authorities are commissioning, an understanding of social value and influences on it should also input into the risk profiling process. Unfortunately, short term financial risks are prioritised over this more complex area; but it will be difficult to achieve ambitions for public service delivery without addressing approaches to risk. Some of the emerging trends and consistent risk areas for voluntary sector involvement in public services can be summarised as follows:

Uncertainty and control

‘Full cost recovery’ has somewhat fallen off the radar in the past two years where a ‘get what you’re given’ attitude has prevailed. However, it still stands that the higher the level of uncertainty in this area, the higher the risk that charity is taking on. Cash flow, payment times, length of contract, application of TUPE, and referral rates are all common areas of uncertainty, and hence risk, for charities working directly with the public sector or being sub-contracted by private providers. Being ‘kept in the dark’ leads to a significant loss of control. This is not then balanced with the cutting back of control mechanisms used by contracting authorities during the course of the contract. Ideally, greater levels of certainty for a delivery partner should be combined with proportionate reporting and monitoring requirements.

Competition and scale

We only have to look to the Work Programme to see the impact that competition and scale can have on service delivery relationships at a community level. Lower-tier providers are forced to deliver below-cost, or are pushed out of involvement in services altogether. This effect is also seen at a local authority level where larger VCS organisations and private entities are in a stronger position to negotiate contracts and provide upfront capital, significantly skewing competition but not necessarily always resulting in the best services for beneficiaries.

Sub-contracting and spot purchasing

Working with more than one contractor, or different types of contractor, is always going to have the potential to expose a charity to more risk and to new risk. This is especially the case when referral rates are not guaranteed and payments are delayed. Finding the upfront cash to set up and run services to be purchased on a ‘spot-purchase’ basis, such as through personal budgets, is a significant risk for many, defeating the object of the approach by potentially reducing the choice actually available to those purchasing the services. Shifting the risk Improving collaboration in public service delivery requires thought to how service structure affects stakeholders and outcomes. It perhaps goes without saying when discussing risk with a voluntary sector audience, that as the funder and ultimate custodian of the service, the contractor holds significant power in the service delivery relationship. How this power can be better used to tap into the quality and expertise of voluntary sector providers in their communities, and to actually achieve lasting social change, is determined to a degree by approach to risk. Social investment is often mooted as the solution to all of this, providing the upfront capital and therefore enabling more organisations to enter into the delivery market. However, shouldn’t we look at other ways we can improve the market before trying to pull investment in? Supporting the development of a fair, competitive market, with a healthy balance of risks between organisations will make it a more attractive place to invest, and will also result in better public services. Sometimes charities are accused of complaining about our lot, but in reality these are issues that transpire beyond our sector and are impacting on the quality of our public services. Taking a chance on the voluntary sector and shifting the approach to risk might just be what is needed. To read our joint report on Open Public Services: Experiences of the Voluntary Sector published in early 2013, see here. « Back to all blog posts

Blog

Public service delivery is risky business

Related Content

Finance Focus May 2018

Where are the ‘automatic stabilisers’ for charities income?

6 simple steps your charity can take to help protect themselves from fundraising fraud

NCVO Almanac points to fundamental shifts in the charity operating environment

Better partnerships needed between finance and fundraising teams

IFS 2017 Green Budget – the good, the bad, and the worrying?

Tony Armstrong looks at Devolution: working with local organisations to transform public services

Devolution is our chance to advocate for the most vulnerable

How will the 'devolution revolution' be financed?

Caron asks: 'Why does the voluntary sector need a devolution summit?'

Do charities need to become social enterprises to survive?

EU Referendum: Keep watching this space…

EU Referendum: What could this mean for charities?

Hunting for the silver lining; the IFS, the economy and charities.

What did the Romans ever know about data protection?

Just one thing, Sir John...

The time for ‘rational optimism’ – A response to Matt Ridley

How much do we know about PbR?

Can charities help end the ‘pushmi-pullyu’ of local government spending to support prevention?

Fog of uncertainty makes post-election planning difficult for charities

Vision for sector post-2015. What did the politicians have to say at the CFG Annual Conferece?

Managing in a Downturn Report Reflections....

A change in economic outlook- is your charity sinking or swimming… tell us!

2014, politics, and charities

De-regulation for the sake of it?

Economic Outlook Briefing 2019/20

How the best boards do it, from preparation to meeting execution

Seeing the wood for the trees

Charity Property Matters Survey 2018

CFG responds to the Charity Commission’s consultation on the SORP-making process

What the recent SCOTUS judge controversy can teach us about the Charities’ SORP

Annual Report 2017-18: Empowering Your People

Changes to the CFG Board of Trustees

10 questions to ask before borrowing

Large Charities Focus

“Who moved the cheese?” The case for innovation in the UK charity sector

Economic Outlook Briefing 2018

Charities need to find nearly £4bn additional income by 2020 finds CFG

The key to good governance - truly understanding the business

Does your charity follow serious incident reporting guidelines?

Charity finance professionals need to be aware of new automatic disqualification rules

How big a threat is property to your charity?

Money is not the issue when it comes to charging for Charity Commission

How can charity investors perform better in a volatile market?

A stairway to heaven on business rates for the charity sector?

What do the latest Budget 2017 economic numbers mean for charities?

Live Blog: Autumn Budget 2017

Investing in financial governance is one of the most cost effective ways to help your charity

What should charities expect from the Autumn Budget 2017?

Sarah Atkinson - Have your say on the annual return for charities

New report raises concerns about complacency on financial governance

Trustee Survey Report

Time to review your risks? An update from the experts...

Autumn budget submission 2017

Government no longer has the luxury of ignoring charities

Do I need a fraud response plan?

Fraud and the 3 C's

Autumn budget submission

Three new Charity Finance Group trustees elected

Could political instability create financial instability for charities?

How can charities ensure they work towards gender equality in their organisation?

What can charities learn from the recent fraud cases?

CFG launches Counter Fraud Campaign

Record Management Toolkit Launch Roundup

What can charities learn from the international cyber attack?

Common Gift Aid Questions Answered by HMRC

Annual Report 2016-17

Essential Charity Finance for Trustees Guide

We must not see a rush to charging charities for regulation – House of Lords report

Budget Focus: Warning signs for charities in years ahead

Live Blog: Spring Budget 2017

Spring budget submission

Responsible Record Keeping: what do voluntary organisations need to know?

Autumn Statement In Focus: What is the economic outlook for charities?

Three things for charities to consider in the wake of Trump victory

Trustee Week: Working to inspire good leadership

Charging charities for regulation isn’t inevitable but it is risky and inefficient